Kinda Suspicious Rust

Listen, when someone questions why you use i and j for loop counters, there's only one valid response: IT'S THE LAW. It's like asking why we drink coffee or hate meetings that could've been emails. Some traditions in programming aren't meant to be questioned—they're sacred knowledge passed down from the ancient CS gods. Using foo and bar as placeholder names, tabs vs spaces, and i , j , k for nested loops... these are the unwritten commandments that separate the true believers from the heretics. Sure, you could use descriptive variable names like index or counter , but then your fellow devs might think you're some kind of revolutionary anarchist. And nobody wants that kind of reputation in the office.

Nothing transforms a grizzled C++ veteran quite like discovering Bjarne Stroustrup's book has an anime girl on the cover. The pipeline from memory management hell to waifu wonderland is shorter than you'd think. Ten years of fighting segfaults and undefined behavior, only to be lured into the light by cute anime characters. The beard-to-catgirl pipeline is real, folks. The ultimate C++ optimization isn't move semantics—it's moving to a completely different aesthetic.

Romance is cute and all, but have you ever spent 96 hours straight hunting down a missing semicolon? That compiler error keeping you up at night, chugging energy drinks while your bloodshot eyes scan 2,000 lines of code for the fifth time. And then—at hour 97—you find it hiding between two perfectly innocent statements. The sweet relief is better than any relationship could ever be. Until the next syntax error shows up tomorrow.

The endless language wars, distilled into a perfect four-panel takedown. First three panels show devs smugly defending their chosen tribe - Python zealots with their "readability", C++ purists flexing their memory management muscles, and Java devs strutting around with their enterprise credentials. Then the fourth panel drops the bomb: the polyglot dev who's mastered multiple languages looking at everyone like they're fighting over which crayon tastes best. After 15 years in the trenches, I've learned the hard truth - the best language is whatever solves the problem without making you want to throw your laptop out the window. Everything else is just programmer peacocking.

The eternal dilemma of function design perfectly illustrated on an IQ bell curve. The low-IQ crowd (0.1%) and high-IQ geniuses (0.1%) agree: "Just add a new function." Meanwhile, the average devs (34%) in the middle are sweating bullets, desperately clinging to their sacred principle of code reuse: "NO WE SHOULD ADD ANOTHER PARAMETER AND REUSE CODE!" It's the horseshoe theory of programming - both extremes of the intelligence spectrum somehow reach the same conclusion while the "well-actually" crowd in the middle is busy creating those monstrous functions with 17 optional parameters, 9 of which are booleans. And they wonder why nobody wants to maintain their code...

The classic "create your own job security" maneuver. Taking a job where Rust isn't required, then sneakily rewriting a problematic component in your favorite language is the corporate equivalent of moving into someone's house and slowly replacing all their furniture. Before they know it, you're not just living there—you own the place. This is how tech evangelism works in the trenches. No fancy conference talks, just guerrilla warfare: "Oh that critical component that kept breaking? I fixed it... in Rust. Now nobody else can maintain it but me. Checkmate, management." And the 270 upvotes? That's 270 developers who've either done this or are taking notes.